329 
El  2d 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2018  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/thirdpartiesOOelde 


[from  the 


NATIONAL  ERA.] 


PHILADELPHIA: 

MSRRIHEW  AND  THOMPSON,  PRINTERS, 

No.  7  Carter’s  Alley. 

1851. 


ETP  [LJ 


r- 


_TLI 


The  Article  which  follows  appeared  in  the  National  Era  of  May  1  and 
subsequent  numbers  of  that  well-tred  journal.  If  the  views  which  it 
presents  so  clearly  could  receive  an  idditional  recommendation,  it  would 
be  found  in  the  announcement  by  tie  Editor  of  the  Era  that  it  is  from 
the  pen  of  Da.  William  Elder. 

June  19,  1851. 


0  5  °l '  ci  5>*^ 


\;’i  ct 


r 


“THE  DUTY  OF  ANTI-SLAVERY  VOTERS.” 


May  1,  1851. 


The  question  of  questions  with  the  readers  and  writers 
of  the  Era  just  now,  is  being  discussed  under  this  caption. 
In  terms  very  general  you  answer  it,  (in  your  leader  of  the 
20th  February:)  “We  can  (ought  to)  vote  our  principles 
into  office.”  “  Use  the  ballot-box  for  the  establishment  of 
free  principles.”  “  In  every  State  we  should  take  care  to 
insure  the  election  of  anti-slavery  men  *  *  *  by  using 

our  elective  franchise  wisely.” 

Taken  together,  your  article  is  clear  and  unequivocal  up¬ 
on  the  point  of  duty.  I  read  the  sentences  quoted  with 
emphasis  upon  the  words  insure  and  wisely ,  and  insist  upon 
so  enforcing  and  directing  their  significance.  Duty  gets  a 
different  statement  and  drift  when  calculated  from  the  point 
of  results,  from  what  it  receives  when  inferred  from  general 
principles  without  any  consideration  of  results.  In  the  one 
case,  a  man  may  justify  himself  by  doing  no  wrong,  though 
at  the  expense  of  doing  nothing  useful  for  the  excellent  end 
in  view  ;  in  the  other,  he  will  make  sure  to  do  right,  and 
whatever  is  practicable  and  expedient  also.  In  the  one, 
the  man  is  intent  upon  saving  his  own  soul  and  maintaining 
his  consistency  of  principle,  whatever  becomes  of  the  enter- 
^  prise ;  in  the  other,  he  throws  his  soul  into  it,  equally  care- 
f  ful  for  both,  under  the  conviction  that  there  must  be  some 
?  right  way  of  doing  and  getting  the  thing  done,  if  it  be  a 
3  duty  at  all.  The  one  may  stop  short  with  self  sacrifice  and 
solemn  protest,  the  other  sets  his  heart  earnestly  upon 


2 


achievement.  The  one  is  sublime  in  principle,  the  other  be¬ 
neficent  in  practice,  with  all  the  possible  difference  that  may 
be  between  abstract  truth  and  providential  use. 

In  the  interspace  and  difference  of  these  two  apprehen¬ 
sions  of  duty,  your  wrord  wisely  mediates,  for  expediency  is 
the  wisdom  of  actual  life — the  adjustment,  every  moment 
demanded,  of  principles  to  affairs,  in  order  to  effect  the 
greatest  possible  good  in  the  circumstances,  without  ob¬ 
scuring,  or  weakening,  or  offending  against  the  truth  which 
rightfully  rules  the  case.  It  must  not  be  forgotten,  either, 
that  this  territory,  which  is  thus  under  the  dominion  of  an 
honest  discretion,  is  also  the  devil’s  own  play-ground — a 
wilderness  of  temptation,  where  he  would  turn  stones  into 
bread  to  meet  an  exigency  or  avoid  a  trial — a  nice  pinnacle 
point  of  balance,  hard  to  maintain,  from  'which  he  tempts 
world-menders  to  cast  themselves  in  headlong  impatience — 
a  grand  prospect,  offering  glorious  success  in  reward  of  de¬ 
mon  worship  !  Heaven  help  us!  Besides  being  honest,  we 
need  to  be  wise  as  serpents,  avoiding  their  wickedness,  or, 
for  the  world’s  use,  we  might  as  well  not  be  at  all. 

I  am  going  to  assume  a  general  assent  to  your  statement 
of  our  duty .  By  which  I  understand  explicitly,  in  the  first 
place,  that  we  must  do  something  ;  secondly,  that  we  must 
do  it  in  truth  and  righteousness ;  and,  thirdly,  that  wre  must 
do  as  much  of  it  as  possible,  without  shrinking  from  the 
conditions,  in  order  to  take  care  of  the  rest  of  our  goodness 
and  wisdom  which  we  cannot  get  into  immediate  play.  In 
this  way,  and  on  these  terms,  the  wrorld  does  get  along — 
with  some  help,  to  be  sure,  from  the  impracticables  who  do 
the  preaching  and  protesting  of  the  great  principles  which 
over- rule  all,  and  will,  in  good  time,  rule  in  all. 

But  in  the  mean  time,  what  of  the  method  and  policy  of 


3 


our  action  in  the  premises  ?  This  is  the  open  question ; 
very  full  of  difficulty  in  itself,  for  it  envoi ves  the  whole  the¬ 
ory  of  reform,  which,  perhaps,  nobody  understands  tho¬ 
roughly  ;  and  is,  besides,  complicated  by  different  opinions 
sharply  opposed  to  each  other,  and  obscured,  also,  by  much 
doubt  and  hopelessness,  which  demand  satisfaction  before 
they  can  be  arrayed  into  any  shape  for  service. 

One  opinion  would  return,  in  effect,  to  the  old  close-com¬ 
munion  Liberty  organization,  pivoted  upon  its  one  idea ; 
another  would  go  forward  to  something  still  more  severely 
and  exactly  conscientious  than  that,  for  the  sake  of  scrupu¬ 
lousness  and  logical  perfectness :  a  third  would  organize  a 
reserve  guard  of  light  troops,  choice  men  and  brave  spirits, 
capable  of  being  wheeled  into  line  and  brought  to  the  charge 
wherever  a  dash  might  be  made  in  the  heat  of  a  conflict, 
with  the  whole  field  of  politics,  and  both  sides  of  the  battle, 
for  range  of  action ;  a  fourth,  worn  out  in  the  old  service, 
and  tired  of  drill,  will  enlist  nowhere,  and  answrer  to  no 
muster-roll,  but  will  vote  for  officers  only  who  promise  to 
fight  for  the  right ;  and  perhaps  another  variety  is  ready 
for  re- absorption  into  their  old  parties,  from  which  they 
rose,  in  the  notion  that  a  few  drops  of  fresh  water  may  sen¬ 
sibly  abate  the  saltness  of  the  sea.  And  there  remains  still 
another  way,  which  you  suggest,  (in  Era,  No.  219,)  as  the 
“  thought  of  many  friends  ;”  and  “  if  we  are  to  have  a  new 
national  organization,”  it  has  your  approbation,  to  wit: 
“  The  formation  of  a  new  party,  taking  the  Democratic 
principle  as  its  central  idea,  and  boldly  applying  it  to  the 
solution  of  all  the  political  questions  now  pressing  upon  the 
public  mind.” 

Without  charging  myself  with  the  orderly  treatment  of 
these  propositions,  I  will  offer  some  thoughts  upon  them, 


4 


expecting  the  application  wherever  it  is  clear  and  correct 
in  the  reader’s  apprehension. 

A  political  party  cannot  be  built  upon  a  sentiment  which 

respects  only  the  interests  of  a  small  or  otherwise  inconsid- 

■* 

erable  class  of  the  people,  very  unlike  in  circumstances  and 
wants  from  the  mass ;  because,  the  general  business  of 
Government,  and  the  rights  of  other  classes,  are  impera¬ 
tive  ;  because,  the  progress  and  promise  of  the  established 
order  must  go  forward  ;  and  because,  one  reform  will  not 
'Wait  for  another,  less  favorably  circumstanced,  or  be  post¬ 
poned  or  excluded  by  it. 

Nay,  more :  a  political  party  and  policy  cannot  be  built 
upon  a  sentiment  at  all.  They  must  grow  out  of  interests 
— all  the  interests  which  Government  is  concerned  about. 
A  great  idea  may,  indeed,  monopolize  the  attention  of  a 
community  for  a  time ;  perhaps  one  important  specialty  or 
another  does  exclusively  command  the  public  mind  until  it 
gets  settled  ;  but  whenever  such  particular  sentiment  or  in¬ 
terest  is  really  strong  enough  to  employ  a  party,  or  form 
one,  it  is  strong  enough  to  constrain  an  existing  one.  New 
organizations  are  not  necessary  to  new  movements,  unless 
they  are  revolutionary  in  their  character  and  manner  of 
working  ;  neither  can  such  separate  organizations  sustain 
themselves  long  enough  for  success,  because  they  have  their 
own  partialism  and  defectiveness  to  answer  for,  as  well  as 
their  proper  antagonism  to  meet  in  its  fortified  places. 

A  moral  reform,  as  such,  is  not  the  legitimate  business  of 
Government  functionaries.  They  are  appropriately  occu¬ 
pied  only  with  the  conduct  of  affairs,  according  to  the  prin¬ 
ciples  which  rule  in  the  Constitution.  The  “  Higher  Law” 
is  not  the  rule  of  representative  legislation  ;  republicanism 
restrains  its  representatives  to  the  duty  of  reflecting  the 


5 


public  sentiment  and  giving  form  and  effect  to  the  public 
will.  .  A  member  of  Congress  is  not  deputed  to  digest  the 
Divine  will  into  statutes  to  be  enforced  by  courts  of  justice, 
but  as  an  agent  to  effectuate  that  of  his  constituency.  The 
“  Higher  Law”  is  the  rule  of  right,  the  rule  of  the  individ¬ 
ual  conscience ;  but  no  Democratic  legislator  has  the  right 
to  misrepresent  the  people  for  whom  he  acts,  either  by  a 
higher  or  lower  law  than  reflects  them  truly.  He  should 
not  deceive  them  in  their  suffrages,  nor  should  he  disappoint 
them  in  his  services.  The  system  of  civil  government  and 
the  economy  of  society  are  so  much  below  the  truth,  so  sadly 
out  of  harmony  with  right,  that  we  must  not  expect  con¬ 
formity  to  good  conscience  and  the  Divine  will  in  the  ad¬ 
ministration  of  affairs.  Are  we  not  a  Christian  people  ? 
Yet  what  impediment  did  our  morality  and  religion  oppose 
to  the  annexation  of  Texas,  and  the  assumption  of  her 
crimes — to  the  Mexican  war — to  the  Compromise  measures  of 
the  last  Congress  ?  These  things  have  all  happened  within 
the  last  seven  years  !  Seven  years  before  the  first  of  them, 
they  all  felt  incredible  and  impossible ;  but  they  are  facts 
now  ;  not  intolerable,  but  quietly  familiar.  A  moral  senti¬ 
ment  claim  controlling  authority  in  Government  !  Why, 
one  hero  of  that  war  has  been  elected  President  of  the  na¬ 
tion  for  the  glory  of  it,  and  another  is  now  a  candidate  up¬ 
on  its  merits,  and  all  the  prominent  aspirants  for  public 
favor  are  building  their  hopes  upon  one  or  other  of  the  enor¬ 
mities  of  this  bloody  week  of  years  ! 

A  moral  sentiment  inaugurated  in  the  system  of  politics  ! 
American  Republicanism  separates  Church  and  State,  di¬ 
vorces  religion  from  politics  upon  system,  and  our  churches 
surrender  to  the  Government  supremacy  in  all  points  of 
morals  which  it  chooses  to  usurp  !  Is  it  worth  while  to  talk 


6 


of  carrying  a  principle  of  piety,  Christian  duty,  and  broth¬ 
erly  love,  into  the  Administration,  while  it  is  discounte¬ 
nanced  by  the  churches  to  which  the  officers  belong  ? 

I  conclude  that  slavery,  considered  as  a  sin,  an  immoral¬ 
ity,  or  wrong  inflicted  upon  our  neighbor,  offers  no  complete 
basis  for  a  political  party,  and  no  nucleus  for  a  political  or¬ 
ganization.  We  have  seen  the  higher  law  mocked  and 
scorned  when  it  was  arrayed  point-blank  against  the  lower. 
Where  it  could  not  be  evaded  it  was  defied,  and  the  Chief 
Priests  have  joined  with  Herod  and  Pontius  Pilate  in  its 
crucifixion.  From  which  we  learn  that  the  Christianity  of 
to-day  will  not  submit  to  that  of  the  millennium  ;  nay,  that 
it  will  not  tolerate  it,  but  joins  with  patriotism  in  calling 
upon  Pilate  to  crucify  it  as  he  is  a  friend  to  Caesar.  But — 
it  is  not  the  business  of  philosophy  to  rail  at  facts,  but  to 
learn  by  them. 

This  is  not  said  in  doubt  or  condemnation  of  our  organ¬ 
ized  movements  in  the  past.  Whatever  expectations  they 
have  disappointed,  they  yet  have  answered  their  proper 
ends.  They  have  informed  public  opinion  and  awakened 
public  sentiment,  by  means  of  oral  discussion,  and  newspa¬ 
per  and  periodical  publications  ;  and  they  have  carried  their 
system  of  propagandism  into  the  halls  of  Congress,  and  per¬ 
haps  every  free  State  Legislature  in  the  Union :  all  means 
have  been  employed  that  could  give  earnestness  and  inter¬ 
est  to  the  discussion,  until  every  interest  and  enterprise  of 
the  times,  in  both  Church  and  State,  has  been  reached  by 
it ;  until  abolitionism  has  become  an  institution  with  all  the 
apparatus  and  relations  of  a  religious,  moral,  and  political 
reform.  It  has  had  it3  special  representatives  in  most  of 
the  Legislatures  of  the  North,  as  well  as  in  both  branches 
of  the  National  Congress,  though  it  has  not,  I  believe,  car- 


K>*\ ihuii 


m  n 


7 


ried  any  measure  of  policy  by  its  own  proper  organic  force 
— its  success  having  been  achieved,  generally,  through  coali¬ 
tions  with  minority  parties,  where,  in  conjunction,  they  hap¬ 
pened  to  have  the  required  strength. 

In  saying  that  the  Liberty  party  could  not  get  estab¬ 
lished  in  the  Government,  I  am  not  saying  that  its  existence 
was  a  mistake,  for  it  may  have  been  a  proper  and  necessary 
means  of  forwarding  the  cause  in  that  sphere  and  direction  ; 
and  I  think  it  was  ;  and  I  think,  for  this  reason,  that  it  was 
worth  all  the  labor  and  money  which  it  cost.  The  disap¬ 
pointment  of  an  ostensible  aim  is  nothing  in  a  right  effort, 
if  its  proper  effect  is  nevertheless  secured. 

In  1848  the  Liberty  party  was  merged  in  a  new  organi¬ 
zation,  with  a  creed  intended  to  cover  all  the  issues  then 
available  as  rallying-points,  and  deserving  of  such  support. 
This  fact,  itself,  is  evidence  that  the  former  movement  had 
become  incapable  of  the  expected  service.  In  other  words, 
the  party  felt  that  it  would  no  longer  avail  to  be  only  preach¬ 
ers  of  a  supplementary  gospel  of  politics,  or  to  stand  still 
in  the  attitude  of  watching  and  criticising  the  great  parties 
who  were  fighting  within  reach  of  the  victory,  but  that  it 
must  bring  itself  into  the  front  of  the  battle,  with  all  the 
means  of  success,  and  all  the  capacities  to  administer  the 
power  contended  for. 

When  the  Liberty  party  was  formed,  it  was  right ;  talent 
and  zeal  are  good  for  nothing  if  the  amount  invested  in  that 
movement  could  not  secure  against  a  total  blunder.  While 
it  lived  it  was  right,  and  when  it  died  it  was  because  it  had 
fulfilled  its  office  and  lost  its  capacity  for  use  by  change  of 
the  conditions  which  had  called  it  into  being.  A  new 
method  was  made  necessary  by  the  very  success  of  the  old. 

These  notions  of  a  party,  formed  upon  a  single  idea,  or  a 


8 


specialty  less  than  a  whole  governmental  system,  are  cor¬ 
roborated,  I  think,  by  extending  them  to  the  case  of  the 
anti-slavery  representatives  elected  to  both  Houses  of  Con¬ 
gress  ;  that  is,  by  looking  at  the  actual  successes  of  the 
scheme,  as  well  as  inferring  its  working  capacities  from 
general  considerations. 

In  the  lower  House,  nearly  a  dozen  men  of  extraordinary 
abilities  and  zeal  represent  the  anti-slavery  sentiment,  and, 
in  fact,  permit  no  opportunity  for  its  defence  and  advocacy 
to  pass  unimproved.  In  the  earlier  days  of  the  controversy, 
Adams  and  Giddings  took  the  position  and  pressed  the  doc¬ 
trines  of  the  movement  with  all  the  effect  that  mind  of  the 
highest  force  and  range,  and  heart  of  the  firmest  quality, 
could  insure.  They  had  the  nation  for  their  audience,  and 
nothing  was  wanting  in  the  champions,  the  cause,  or  its 
conditions,  to  agitate  a  people  thoroughly.  From  that  day 
to  this,  the  assault  has  not  slackened  fire  or  altered  its  aim ; 
and  Hale  in  the  Senate  has  for  years  now  been  as  active, 
capable,  and  efficient,  as  the  warmest  friend  could  wish.  I 
believe  that  every  man  sent  to  Congress  expressly  on  this 
errand  has  done  his  whole  duty.  The  men  of  other  parties 
have  disappointed  our  reasonable  expectations  and  broken 
their  express  pledges  ;  but  our  own  representatives  in  no 
instance.  The  last  seven  years  has  brought  up  the  subject 
in  every  form,  and  we  have  had  our  champions  present,  in 
every  variety  of  quality  and  adaptation,  to  give  it  the  most 
ample  and  thorough  development.  For  all  the  purposes  of 
agitation  and  propagandism,  the  Congressional  controversy 
has  been  full  to  complete  satisfaction. 

And  now  the  question  comes  up,  Have  we  any  thing  more 
to  hope  from  this  agency  ?  Or,  is  it  so  promising  that  we 
should  address  all  our  energies  to  its  continuance  and  ex¬ 
tension  ? 


I 


9 

My  own  opinion  is,  that  an  Abolition  speech  in  Congress 
has  no  longer  any  special  or  considerable  power  to  arouse 
or  convince,  any  more  than  if  it  had  equal  publicity  through 
our  other  means  of  publication  ;  and  I  think  that  the  ineffi¬ 
cacy  of  such  speeches  to  the  legitimate  ends  of  legislation 
is  now  felt  as  a  fault,  at  the  same  time  that  they  afford  no 
compensation  in  the  conviction  and  persuasion  of  the  pub¬ 
lic.  There  is  such  a  thing  as  the  interest  and  excitement  of 
a  debate  surviving  its  utility. 

From  another  ground  I  draw  the  same  conclusion.  Agi¬ 
tation  was  once  the  best  service  that  could  be  rendered  to 
the  cause  of  liberty,  and  Congress  Hall  the  best  place  for 
it.  The  North  understood  it  so,  and  desired  it ;  the  South 
understood  it  so,  and  feared  it.  Silence,  absolute,  -was  the 
demand  in  1837,  and  the  slaveholders  at  that  time  used 
every  means,  most  unscrupulously,  to  enforce  it.  But  how 
is  it  now  ?  The  discussions  of  slavery  have  been  almost  un¬ 
interrupted  through  the  period  of  the  last  Congress,  and 
they  were  led  off  in  almost  every  instance  by  the  pro-slavery 
leaders  !  Whatever  this  change  means  in  other  respects,  it 
is  a  significant  one  touching  the  policy  of  agitation  and  de¬ 
bate  in  the  Capitol  for  out-door  purposes.  And  the  effect 
of  the  long  discussion  upon  the  respective  Houses !  No 
abolitionist  looks  without  amazement  at  the  reports.  He 
finds  none  of  the  effects  upon  the  opposition  members  which 
he  expected,  from  the  faithful  exhibition  of  the  truth,  when, 
some  years  ago,  he  labored  so  hard  merely  to  get  it  a  hear¬ 
ing.  Liberty  and  Slavery  have  had  a  hand-to-hand  strug¬ 
gle  in  the  freest  field  of  combat  in  the  world  ;  Europe  has 
all  the  while  been  shaken  with  revolutions ;  and  America 
has  been  even  extravagant  in  its  sympathies;  the  issues 
involved  were  of  the  most  urgent  practical  importance ;  the 


10 


sentiment  and  the  interests  were  in  their  fullest  activity; 
yet  the  champions  of  the  wrong  have  not  been  overwhelmed ; 
they  have  not  been  made  to  confess  it ;  and  they  are  even 
supported  in  their  defiant  attitude  by  frequent  and  flagrant 
apostacies  from  principle  in  the  ranks  of  allies  which  the 
friends  of  Liberty  relied  upon  with  the  greatest  assurance. 
In  all  these  years  legislation  has  constantly  answered  to  the 
demands  of  the  enemy  ;  the  victory  rests  with  the  spirit  of 
aggression,  and  success  is,  as  usual,  working  out  its  own 
justification,  and  changing  itself  into  glory  that  passes  al¬ 
most  unchallenged  ! 

So  soon  as  the  field  of  debate  was  fairly  opened  and  freed, 
the  friends  of  the  right  brought  the  abstract  principles  of 
truth  and  righteousness  to  bear  upon  the  opposition  ;  and 
behold  !  this  day  they  are  openly  repudiated.  Seven  years 
ago,  these  principles  asked  only  a  hearing;  to-day,  they 
are  seeking  for  shelter  and  defence  !  Conscience  and  the 
Higher  Law  have  the  reputation  of  a  pestilence — Compro¬ 
mise  and  quiet  are  the  only  patriotism  and  orthodoxy  ! 

A  political  party  with  abolitionism  for  its  exclusive,  or 
principal,  or  central  idea,  gets  no  countenance  from  any  of 
these  considerations.  In  this  form  and  array  it  has  already 
suffered  the  defeat  of  its  aims  in  the  policy  of  the  Govern¬ 
ment  and  country. 

To  those  to  whom  this  argument  is  conclusive  or  unneces 
sary,  it  may  seem  also  tedious ;  but  I  have  other  uses  for 
the  investigation  than  its  bearing  upon  this  particular  pro¬ 
position,  and  I  proceed  with  it  'with  this  view. 

Domestic  Slavery  at  the  South  surpasses  every  other  evil 
in  the  minds  of  the  Abolitionists  of  the  North  ;  but  it  is  not 
so  felt  among  the  people  who  must  be  relied  upon  for  politi¬ 
cal  opposition  to  it.  An  analysis  of  the  classes  of  voters  in 


11 


the  North,  with  their  party  affinities,  would  be  a  most  va¬ 
luable  achievement.  But  our  purpose  demands  only  an  im¬ 
perfect  classification ;  and  it  will  be  safe  loosely  to  assign 
the  mercantile  and  manufacturing  men,  the  aspiring  politi¬ 
cians,  the  leading  churchmen,  and  aristocratic  capitalists 
and  idlers,  to  the  service  of  the  adverse  interest — in  a  word, 
all  the  prosperous,  prudent  classes,  who  prefer  their  pros¬ 
pects  and  their  ease  to  the  odiousness  and  onerousness  of 
reform  and  agitation.  These,  we  may  as  well  surrender  in 
the  lump  to  the  enemy. 

What  is  the  character  of  our  own  array  and  reliances  ? 
First,  the  men  of  the  martyr  spirit,  and  the  conscience 
class.  These  mustered  something  less  than  7,000  strong  in 
1840,  and  in  1844,  62,000,  with  the  issue  of  slavery  exten¬ 
sion  fairly  before  the  community.  Sixty-two  thousand  out 
of  two  and  a  half  millions  !  If  that  is  not  the  highest  aver¬ 
age  for  an  anti-slavery  party,  it  is  near  enough  to  judge  it 
by.  (In  1848  a  large  auxiliary  force  was  brought  in  upon 
an  enlarged  platform,  but  chiefly  though  an  accidental  dis¬ 
affection  in  the  ranks  of  the  Democratic  party,  and  a  few 
recruits  from  the  Whig  ranks,  induced  by  its  imposing 
promise.  But  it  was  not  supposed  or  intended  to  be  a  per¬ 
manent  organization. 

The  source  of  growth  and  hope  of  strength  for  such  a 
party  would  be  chiefly  in  the  class  of  voters  who  are  not 
committed  by  interest  or  affection  to  the  present  ruling  par¬ 
ties.  These  are  the  laborers  and  the  small  proprietaries, 
who  are  not  specially  exposed  to  temptation.  All  that  are 
free  in  their  conditions,  with  all  that  are  either  refractory, 
discontented,  or  progressive  in  character;  and  after  these 
were  won  and  organized,  the  better  portion  of  the  conser¬ 
vatives  made  ready  to  move  by  the  promise  of  immediate, 


12 


* 


or  at  least  certain  success.  One  or  two  hundred  thousand 
devotees  of  the  sentiment  might  be  set  down  for  service  in 
any  circumstances.  But  how  does  the  project  stand  ad¬ 
dressed  to  the  other  divisions  of  this  hope  ? 

With  the  multitude  of  working  men  employed  at  wages 
by  capitalists,  the  question  of  personal  liberty  or  chattel 
slavery  is  by  no  means  the  principal  one  of  the  times.  They 
are  too  much  occupied  with  their  own  social  and  pecuniary 
privations,  too  much  occupied  with  the  general  interests  of 
productive  industry,  and  the  more  equal  distribution  of 
wealth  in  their  own  world,  to  give  an  effective  sympathy  to 
the  slave  of  the  South.  With  them,  the  first  necessities  of 
life  are  at  stake,  or,  if  daily  bread  is  regularly  earned  by 
daily  toil,  the  felt  insecurity  of  the  provision  presses  upon 
them ;  and  this  feeling  is  enhanced  by  the  wants  of  that 
ambition  and  aspiration  which  civil  freedom  inspires  for 
themselves  and  for  their  dependencies.  They  are  not  so 
much  at  ease  in  their  own  condition  as  to  feel  the  impulses 
of  a  disinterested  philanthropy.  The  emancipation  of  the 
bondman  does  not  come  easily  home  to  their  sympathies,  for 
the  want  of  analogy  to  their  own  evils  and  necessities. 
Nor  do  the  theories  which  grow  up  out  of  their  own  fami¬ 
liar  speculations  easily  apply  to  the  slave’s  condition. 

The  English  and  Irish  poor  tacitly  assent  to  emancipa¬ 
tion  doctrines  at  home,  -where  they  mean  nothing  near  and 
practical  to  themselves  ;  but  not  an  immigrant  in  a  hundred 
from  either  of  these  islands  will  acknowledge  abolitionism 
here.  They  are  Democrats,  and  nothing  else,  upon  the  in¬ 
stinct  that  arrays  itself  against  the  forms  of  oppression 
which  affect  themselves,  wherever  you  find  them,  whether 
in  the  alms-house  or  custom-house,  in  the  church  or  gin- 
shop.  Daniel  O’Connell  might  say  what  he  pleased  in  their 


13 


name  at  home,  but  here  he  lost  all  his  power  on  this  point, 
and  Father  Mathew  altered  his  attitude  to  the  subject  mar¬ 
vellously,  when  he  came  under  the  influences  of  our  cli¬ 
mate. 

These  people  are  coming  to  us  from  every  kingdom  of 
Europe,  by  millions  ;  almost  immediately  they  are  active 
elements  of  our  political  movements,  and  they  seem,  as  a 
rule,  insensible  to  the  claims  of  the  chattel  slave.  For  this, 
there  are  many  occasional  causes,  but  the  primary  and  effi¬ 
cient  one  is  such  as  affords  no  hope  of  removal.  And  the 
native  laborers  of  our  great  cities  are,  for  the  like  cause,  as 
far  from  the  sentiment,  and  as  indifferent  to  the  demands 
of  Abolitionism,  as  these. 

In  truth,  it  is  the  great  problem  of  labor,  its  relations  to 
capital,  or  the  system  of  property,  that  occupies  these  peo¬ 
ple.  Bring  them  a  system  of  rights  and  remedies  in  this 
interest,  and  they  will  listen ;  or  give  them  a  method  of 
exerting  their  political  power  hopefully  to  this  end,  and 
they  will  allow  you  to  add  whatever  philanthropy  to  remote 
objects  you  please,  which  will  not  encumber  their  own  work. 
They  are  not  hostile,  but  they  are  not  concerned  ;  and  if 
ever  they  behave  with  violent  injustice  in  this  matter,  it  is 
not  from  any  sentimental  antagonism,  but  in  recklessness 
and  wantonness  toward  that  which  is  nothing  to  them  but 
its  annoyance. 

The  free  negro  and  the  slave  understand  the  matter  of 
personal  liberty  much  better  than  these.  The  want  of  it, 
and  the  fresh  and  well-contrasted  enjoyment  of  it,  keep  the 
feeling  warm  and  strong  in  our  colored  people ;  but  it 
touches  the  free  laborer  nowhere  near  enough  to  be  felt  ve¬ 
hemently.  He  has  never  feared  bondage  ;  he  does  not  find 
his  freedom  a  positive  and  productive  blessing  ;  self-govern- 


14 


ment  is  pretty  well  balanced  in  bis  condition,  by  self-de¬ 
pendence,  with  all  its  burdens  and  responsibilities  ;  for,  in 
embarrassed  circumstances  it  is  not  a  matter  of  perpetual 
exultation,  and  for  that  reason  it  is  less  efficient  as  a  sentiment. 
Indeed,  there  are  some  pinching  places  in  the  toiler’s  ex¬ 
periences  where  the  Declaration  of  Independence  does  feel 
like  “  a  rhetorical  flourish,”  and  that  “inalienable  liberty” 
a  mockery,  which,  while  it  forbids  the  sale  of  the  man’s 
bones  and  muscles  upon  the  auction-block,  nevertheless  al¬ 
lows  the  sale  of  all  there  is  in  them  every  day  at  the 
counter  of  the  employer,  without  hope  of  an  alternative 
for  free  choice. 

I  am  neither  assuming  nor  accepting  that  theory  of  hu“ 
man  nature  which  has  been  called  the  “selfish  system,” 
nor  am  I  denying  to  the  class  of  men  under  discussion  any 
quality  which  humanity,  in  any  condition,  may  boast  of. 
The  mob  and  the  millionaires,  the  mass  and  the  upper  ten, 
are  all  alike  essentially  ;  they  are  all  men — such  men  as 
God  will  yet  make  a  beautiful  world  of.  Indeed,  if  there 
be  any  difference  of  receptivity  for  truth  induced  by  con¬ 
ditions,  it  is  the  poor  who  first  accept  the  gospel  of  reform ; 
for  it  is  to  them  that  it  is  eminently  adapted  ;  but  it  is  be¬ 
cause  it  is  so  adapted  to  their  own  conditions  that  they  re¬ 
ceive  it.  The  proclamation  of  “liberty  to  the  captive” 
makes  the  “  year  of  the  Lord  acceptable  to  them  that  are 
bound .”  Nothing  in  the  nature  of  things  can  better  dis¬ 
pose  the  poor  and  illiterate  toward  redeeming  truth  than 
the  rich,  cultivated,  and  refined,  except  their  special  ad¬ 
justment  to  it  in  circumstances  ;  and  accordingly,  it  is 
found,  in  all  time,  that  the  majorities  have  accepted  for 
themselves  what  they  wanted  for  themselves,  neglecting,  if 
not  opposing,  the  extension  beyond  their  own  sphere  and 


15 


affinities.  The  believing  Jew  has  ever  his  doubts  if  the 
Gentiles  are  included  in  the  covenant  of  grace ;  and  it  is 
only  the  greater  spirits  who  understand  the  brotherhood, 
the  unity,  of  the  race.  Closely  examined,  the  difference 
between  tyrant  and  slave,  oppressed  and  oppressor,  is  not 
so  great  that  the  whole  breadth  of  the  44  great  gulf”  lies  be¬ 
tween  them,  either  here  or  hereafter.  Providence  redeems 
the  world  by  devoting  the  very  highest,  his  chosen  ones,  to 
the  service  of  the  lowest.  The  intermediate  styles  of  men 
are  too  nearly  in  the  condition  of  objects,  to  be  active 
agents  of  the  beneficent  work.  The  missionary  and  martyr 
race  look  through  the  whole,  they  see  the  end  from  the  be¬ 
ginning,  they  reveal  the  truth,  anticipating  its  establish, 
ment.  In  their  enthusiasm  they  are  prone  to  imagine  that 
44  the  ends  of  the  world  have  come  upon  them,”  that  they 
44  stand  in  the  last  days,”  and  that  44  the  day  of  the  Lord  is 
at  hand.”  Nevertheless,  it  is  a  certainty  of  both  reason 
and  experience,  that  the  44  better  time”  must  wait  till  it  is 
woven  gradually  and  smoothly  into  the  life  of  the  world. 
Government,  which  is  only  the  public  business  of  the  com¬ 
munity,  will  not  take  up  the  redemption  of  society  on  specu¬ 
lation  ;  and  political  parties,  whose  instincts  are  measured 
by  their  uses,  get  blind  and  furious  when  the  over-bright 
light  is  flared  into  their  eyes.  Reform,  to  get  recognised 
and  legislated  into  force,  must  first  get  itself  infused  into 
the  life  and  manners  of  the  people,  and  thence  reflected  in 
the  political  administration. 

My  point  is,  that  Southern  slavery,  though  it  touches  every 
concern  of  our  lives,  mingles  in  every  speculation,  and  mixes 
with  every  form  of  business — though  it  follows  the  Ameri¬ 
can  over  the  world,  a  shadow  upon  his  path,  and  an  impedi¬ 
ment  to  every  movement — though  the  slave-hunts  in  which 


16 


the  African  was  first  captured,  in  his  native  wilderness,  are 
reenacted  every  day  before  our  eyes,  in  his  recapture — chat¬ 
tel  slavery  is  yet  not  the  question  with  the  uprising  masses 
of  society.  They  have  their  own  liberty  asserted  complete 
in  paper  charters  ;  they  have  all  its  forms  in  familiar  use, 
and  now  they  are  intent  upon  securing  its  essence,  its  sub¬ 
stantial  promise,  in  fact.  Popular  rights,  sharply  scru¬ 
tinized,  turn  out  to  be  only  the  right  and  position  of  a  hard 
fight  for  the  means  of  life,  to  the  majority  ;  and  the  common 
soldiery,  in  the  great  battle  of  business  competition,  are 
occupied,  as  they  never  were  before,  with  forwarding  the 
progress  which  they  have  already  made,  and  securing  the 
actual  fruits  of  it. 

Some  day  soon,  the  Reformers,  who  are  so  upon  the  sen¬ 
timent,  and  the  Progressives,  who  are  busy  with  their  own 
necessities,  will  understand  each  other  ;  the  Insight  and  the 
Impulse  will  harmonize,  and  the  old  repugnances  against 
each  other  will  be  dropped  along  with  the  old  insurrection¬ 
ary  battle-cries  which  have  lost  all  their  pertinence  and 
power ;  for,  in  fact,  the  feudalism  of  property  which  reigns 
now,  is  wholly  unlike  the  feudalism  of  force,  against  which 
the  old  revolutions  were  arrayed ;  and  republican  liberty 
answers  even  better  all  the  purposes  of  the  new  dynasty 
than  absolute  monarchy  could  do.  The  despotism  of  caste, 
color,  prejudice  and  bigotry,  are  over,  with  all  their  pride  and 
dignity.  The  parties  in  the  struggle  really  are  capital  and 
labor,  and  the  old  watchwords  of  personal  liberty  and  po¬ 
litical  enfranchisement  have  lost  much  of  their  directness 
of  application,  and,  in  proportion,  their  inspiration.  Once 
they  were  the  object  and  end,  now  they  are  but  a  scaf¬ 
folding  to  reach  it.  But  when  all  the  parties  of  progress 
fully  comprehend  the  philosophy  and  method  of  their  great 


17 


purpose,  it  will  be  accomplished ;  for  then  it  will  have  all 
its  friends  in  firm  array,  it  will  have  the  best  use  of  all  its 
own  power,  and  the  consent  also  of  all  that  is  important  in 
the  opposition ;  for  the  integral  plan  will  comprehend  them 
and  their  interests  too.  The  achievement  will  not  stand 
upon  the  precarious  foundation  of  conquest,  but  on  the 
broad  basis  of  accorded  right,  and  then  “  a  nation  may  be 
born  in  a  day,”  but  not  till  then. 

The  project  of  a  new  Democratic  party,  with  your  per¬ 
mission,  I  will  examine  in  my  next,  and  will  then,  perhaps, 
find  some  conclusion  in  my  ideas  about  the  general  matter, 
here  something  too  bald  and  disjointed  in  form  for  my  pur¬ 
pose. 

Senior. 


In  my  former  communication  I  reached  the  conclusion 
that  a  political  party,  pivoted  upon  the  anti-slavery  senti¬ 
ment,  or  mainly  devoted  to  it  and  controlled  by  it,  has  no 
such  adaptation  to  the  administration  of  the  Government, 
and  no  such  expediency  and  availability  even  for  its  own 
proper  ends,  as  might  justify  its  policy. 

I  cannot  presume  that  your  readers  gave  my  thoughts 
such  consideration  as  will  have  kept  them  fresh  in  memory 
through  their  interrupted  publication,  but  I  do  not  intend 
now  to  rehearse  the  points  for  my  present  use,  though  I 
need  their  service  in  my  promised  discussion  of  the  project 
of  “A  New  Party  taking  the  Democratic  principle  as  its 
central  idea,  and  boldly  applying  it  to  the  solution  of  all 
the  questions  now  pressing  upon  the  public  mind.” 

This  scheme  of  a  New  Democratic  Party  must  be  con- 

2 


18 


sidered  not  only  as  to  its  intrinsic  character,  hut  in  refer¬ 
ence  to  the  particular  want  which  it  is  to  meet ;  for  it  is  a 
suggestion  made  to  the  anti-slavery  voters  of  the  country, 
and  offered  to  them  as  a  method  of  effecting  their  special 
object,  to  wit:  “the  divorce  of  the  Federal  Government 
from  all  support  of  slavery,  and  opposition  to  the  evil 
within  constitutional  limits.”  And,  moreover,  while  con¬ 
sidering  it  at  one  time,  as  to  its  several  special  aims,  for  it 
has  many,  and  at  another,  in  its  entirety  of  character  and 
action,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  its  practicability  and 
efficiency  depend  upon  the  equal  earnestness  and  energy 
of  every  principle  and  policy  embraced  in  its  creed ;  and 
this  to  such  degree  and  effect,  that  the  party  would  in  fact 
he  neither  Anti-Slavery,  Land  Reform,  Free  Trade,  nor 
anything  else  that  it  promises,  except  as  these  are  Demo¬ 
cratic  and  mutually  helpful,  dependent,  and  harmonious. 

The  questions  “pressing”  for  governmental  action  and 
settlement  now,  and  for  which  such  new  party  must  provide 
an  opinion  and  a  position  in  its  system,  are,  Anti-Slavery; 
Land  Reform ;  River  and  Harbor  improvement  by  the 
national  funds  ;  Election  of  Officers  by  the  people ;  Tariff 
for  Revenue  with  incidental  Protection,  or  for  Revenue 
only,  or,  Free  Trade  and  Direct  Taxation ;  the  Banking 
system ;  Exemption  of  the  Homestead  from  attachment  for 
debt ;  Restriction  upon  Land  Monopoly ;  and  sundry  other 
questions  of  equal  interest  with  the  best  of  these.  Some 
of  these  things,  mentioned  and  intimated,  are  perhaps  not 
prominent  interests  in  an  organization  for  National  pur¬ 
poses,  because  they  do  not  fall  within  the  functions  of  the 
Federal  Government,  but  they  are  all  of  high  importance 
in  State  action,  and  the  party  that  is  to  apply  “  the  Demo¬ 
cratic  idea  to  all  the  questions  pressing  upon  the  public 


19 


mind,”  must  agree  upon  them  before  it  can  get  into  the 
harmony  required  for  unitary  action  upon  any  of  them. 

The  new  organization  proposes  to  gather  up  the  Reform¬ 
ers  and  Progressives  of  all  parties,  and  embody  them  by 
force  of  their  various  affinities  in  a  separate  and  indepen¬ 
dent  party ;  and  with  this  view,  it  spreads  a  platform  with 
a  plank  in  it  for  every  opinion  which  the  Democratic  idea 
is  capable  of.  Very  well — every  earnest,  honest  man  in 
the  nation  is  wishing  and  waiting  for  an  effective  array  of 
the  wisdom  and  goodness  of  the  country.  And  what  has 
hindered,  hitherto?  The  excellence  of  the  idea  has  ever 
been  just  as  apparent  and  attractive  as  it  can  be  made  ;  yet, 
wonderfully  enough,  no  such  party  exists,  and  its  practica¬ 
bility  is  a  question  now !  And  very  questionable  it  is,  too, 
because  if  it  were  as  feasible  as  beautiful,  it  would  assuredly 
be  in  full  life  and  governing  the  nation  to-day ;  for,  the  men 
who  have  any  enmity  to  the  general  welfare,  or  any  inte¬ 
rest  in  the  continuance  of  abuses,  are  surely  much  less  than 
a  majority  of  our  three  millions  of  voters. 

But  with  the  understanding  of  all  parties  clear,  and  their 
motives  all  pure,  there  is  a  grand  difference  between  sub¬ 
mitting  to  exceptionable  things  in  an  established  party — 
one  of  the  two  into  which  the  country  is  regularly  divided — 
and  accepting  the  overtures  of  a  new  one  got  up  to  secure 
to  every  man  his  special  preferences,  and  which  must,  be¬ 
sides,  be  built  up  into  a  majority  before  it  can  do  anything 
which  it  proposes. 

The  old  party  to  which  a  man  belongs  has  some  thing  or 
things  in  it  for  which  he  gave  it  his  attachments,  things  all 
the  dearer  to  him  for  all  the  fighting  he  has  done  for  them 
with  the  enemy  ;  and,  it  has  the  power  to  effect  them.  If 
occasionally  it  does  nothing  that  he  wishes,  and  opposes  the 


w 


20 


things  he  wishes  most,  there  always  remains  to  him  some 
promise,  and  especially  some  possibility,  that  keeps  the 
hope  of  better  things  alive  in  him.  He  adheres,  though  he 
cannot  give  reasons,  or  answer  objections,  or  justify  incon¬ 
sistencies. 

The  popular  instinct  in  a  rough  sort  of  omnibus  classifi¬ 
cation  divides  good  and  evil  with  only  one  partition  line,  so 
that  in  the  freest  Governments  there  are  usually  but  two 
political  parties.  Indeed,  there  can  be  but  two  in  the  final 
issue  of  questions,  wherever  the  majority  principle  decides 
all  differences.  Fragments  feel  that  they  must  coalesce, 
and  swallow  all  repugnancies  less  than  the  very  greatest, 
when  the  last  trial  comes  ;  and  it  is  natural  enough,  under 
the  anticipation  of  this  necessity,  to  compromise  everything 
but  the  highest  for  the  sake  of  the  highest,  or  for  the  hope- 
fullest,  if  that  is  all  that  is  possible,  or  even  for  the  old 
grudge  when  all  hopes  are  lost,  and  nothing  but  fears  are 
left.  But  even  when  attachments  weaken  and  old  antagon¬ 
isms  abate,  so  that  party  feeling  sits  light  and  loose,  and 
dissatisfaction  goes  the  length  of  a  total  divorce  from  the 
old,  a  transference  to  the  new  is  not  yet  insured ;  for  men 
are  not  the  less  scrupulous  about  new  commitments  for  the 
resistance  they  have  made  against  former  differences,  and 
the  fine  practice  in  hard  fighting  which  it  afforded,  but  the 
contrary.  There  are  no  such  radicals  as  the  refugees  from 
despotism,  and  there  is  no  conscience  so  difficult  as  a 
reformer’s.  Sectarianism  is  secession’s  own  brood,  and 
those  who  divide  for  opinion’s  sake  are  as  likely  to  split  at 
one  seam  as  another,  and  in  fact  usually  do  go  far  to 
demonstrate  that  men,  like  matter,  are  infinitely  divisible. 

Moreover,  (I  am  not  speaking  for  myself,)  the  evils  and 
sins  of  the  established  order  seem  unavoidable,  and  get  a 


shelter  under  the  general  excuses  of  human  infirmity  and 
necessity ;  but  those  of  a  new  voluntary  arrangement  feel 
as  if  they  were  assumed  freely,  and  brought  an  unmitigated 
responsibility  with  them.  The  favorite  doctrine  may  be 
duly  honored,  but  there  are  the  other  things  that  must 
come  with  it,  some  of  them  unwelcome  ;  some  of  them  odi¬ 
ous  ;  and  they  are  not  like  the  old  mischiefs,  to  be  endured 
only,  but  to  be  accepted  and  adopted  !  Above  all,  a  man 
leaves  the  old  because  it  will  do  nothing  that  he  wishes, 
and  will  do  something  that  he  opposes ;  (sentiments  and 
opinions  merely  he  could  overlook).  Will  h‘e  join  the 
new  which  can  do  nothing  that  he  wishes,  though  he  agrees 
with  it  throughout,  and  may,  perchance,  demand  his 
approval  of  something  that  he  disbelieves  and  dislikes  ? 

I  have  indicated  a  dozen  points  of  principle  and  policy 
comprehended  by  the  “  Democratic  idea,”  about  which  men 
may  differ  after  they  have  agreed  upon  anti-slavery — points 
which  must  severally  stand  the  challenge  of  every  man 
whose  soundness  is  to  be  tried  by  them,  and  each  man  must 
be  satisfied  with  at  least  all  of  them  which  he  thinks  import¬ 
ant,  for  he  is  going  now  upon  principle,  in  total  disregard 
of  the  new  party’s  present  feebleness,  and  there  is  no  prac¬ 
tical  good  within  reach  that  might  compensate  for  some 
evil,  but  the  whole  is  to  be  adopted  for  the  purpose  of  pro- 
pagandism,  and  must  be  believed,  supported,  and  defended, 
until  the  time  of  strength  comes,  and  must  not  be  disputed 
then,  when  the  possible  mischief  is  to  take  effect.  If  I  do 
not  mistake  or  exaggerate  this  consideration,  there  are  dif¬ 
ferences  enough  in  the  varieties  of  policy  to  be  embraced, 
to  account  for  the  want  of  such  an  organization  as  we  are 
thinking  about  in  the  past,  and  to  put  the  present  feasi¬ 
bility  into  serious  doubt. 


2* 


22 


✓ 


Differences  of  drift  and  difficulties  in  faith  occur  every¬ 
where.  The  anti-slavery  man  who  is  most  capable  of  sac¬ 
rifice  is  also  the  least  disposed  to  compromise ;  and  besides 
his  “one  idea,”  he  has  several  others  which  must  be  satis¬ 
fied  when  they  are  wakened  up.  He  is  generally  sound  in 
the  matter  of  personal  liberty — the  rights  of  man  against 
property  in  man,  or  chattel  slavery,  and  whatever  of  jus¬ 
tice  and  philanthropy  is  involved  in  it.  He  insists  upon 
civil  freedom  for  all  men,  and  wages  for  work,  against  all 
laws  and  conventions  which  refuse  them  ;  but  for  this  pur¬ 
pose,  and  the  means  of  achieving  it,  will  he  also  pledge  him¬ 
self  to  the  Chartist,  Socialist,  and  industrial  Radical,  and 
make  common  cause  with  them?  And  will  the  “working 
man,”  who  holds  that  the  laborer  ought  to  be  the  partner 
and  pot  the  mere  machinery  of  capital,  step  out  of  the  way 
to  give  aid — not  to  the  slave,  whose  sufferings  appeal  for 
his  compassion,  and  in  any  direct  way  might  have  his  sym¬ 
pathies — but  to  an  anti-slavery  party  which  will  do  nothing 
for  him  ? 

There  are  earnest  men  among  us  who  believe  in  their 
hearts  that  the  best  interests  of  the  industrial  classes  depend 
upon  the  protection  of  home  manufactures  against  the 
“pauper  labor  of  Europe;”  and  they  insist  upon  a  tariff  of 
duties  for  revenue,  with  incidental  protection,  so  distributed 
and  levied  as  shall  in  all  events  secure  this  end;  and  they 
base  this  policy  upon  a  patriotism  and  benevolence  which 
they  hold  to  be  as  great  and  imperative  as  compassion  for 
the  southern  slave,  and  entitled  even  to  preference,  if 
either  must  be  postponed,  because  it  touches  those  wffio  are 
nearer  to  the  level  of  our  natural  sympathies,  and  more 
immediately  and  terribly  exposed  to  the  evils  of  misgovern- 
ment.  And  there,  to  oppose  these,  are  the  Radical  Demo- 


23 


crats,  on  whom  we  must  so  largely  rely,  with  their  cry  of 
anti-bank,  no  monopoly,  and  no  class  legislation. 

Non-imprisonment  for  debt,  exemption  of  the  homestead 
and  of  the  household  furniture  from  execution,  with  a 
thorough  system  of  school  and  college  education,  at  the 
public  expense,  for  every  child  in  the  State,  are  deemed  by 
a  large  body  of  liberalists  essential  to  the  complete  eman¬ 
cipation  of  the  freeman  and  his  family  from  the  disabilities 
of  poverty,  and  the  bondage,  mental  and  personal,  which  it 
inflicts  ;  and  as  much  above  the  claim  of  legal  freedom  for 
the  southern  slave  in  importance  and  urgency,  as  the  cul¬ 
tivated  white  man  outranks  the  ignorant  plantation  drudge 
in  social  and  political  value.  Here,  again,  a  conscientious 
difference  opposes  the  required  conciliation  of  parties. 

A  very  large  class  of  the  recruits  we  must  count  upon  are 
willing  to  break  every  legal  yoke,  and  put  the  whole  world 
upon  such  equality  as  diversity  of  gifts,  fortunes,  and  cul¬ 
ture,  will  allow,  but  will  go  no  farther  to  level  equalities 
and  remove  disabilities.  They  would  give  all  men  equal 
rights  before  the  law,  in  parchment  and  in  possibility,  but 
they  are  firm  for  order,  and  for  all  the  defences  of  indi¬ 
vidualism,  and  all  the  distinctions  of  wealth,  education  and 
rank,  that  free  competition  can  produce  ;  in  the  belief  that 
religion,  law,  and  morals,  individual  and  national  welfare, 
and  all  the  best  interests  of  rich  and  poor,  rest  upon  them. 
Such  men  will  not  accept  the  extreme  of  liberty  as  the 
remedy  for  any  of  our  existing  slaveries ;  they  hope  for  a 
better  method. 

But  there  is  scarcely  any  limit  to  these  differences,  and 
the  very  integrity  of  the  men  to  be  relied  upon  for  the 
necessary  compromises  forbids  the  hope  of  it ;  and  the  pas¬ 
sions  and  prejudices,  with  all  the  forms  of  selfishness  and 


24 


folly,  which  disturb  the  working  of  the  world’s  affairs  in 
other  combinations,  are  to  be  expected  here  as  well. 

Under  all  these  influences,  a  third  party  can  expect  the 
support  only  of  such  men  as  are  willing  to  throw  away  their 
votes  upon  it  for  the  sake  of  doing  right  in  some  particular 
which  such  party  maintains,  and  for  the  sake  of  using  its 
machinery  for  the  purposes  of  moral  suasion  and  proselyt- 
ism ;  and,  of  those  who  resort  to  it  in  a  fit  of  displeasure 
and  temporary  alienation  from  their  old  associates,  as  we 
witnessed  in  New  York  in  1848.  There  are  also  a  few  men 
in  the  world  who  will  support  perfectly  hopeless  nomina¬ 
tions  for  a  lifetime,  on  the  simple  ground  that  they  will  do 
right,  because  they  cannot  do  better ;  a  class  of  men,  by 
the  way,  vTho  are  distinguished  for  always  using  irresistible 
arguments  against  immovable  objections,  and  wiselyresting 
their  case  upon  eternal  principles,  for  the  reason  that 
nothing  less  enduring  is  likely  to  last,  till  the  day  of  their 
triumph. 

There  are  times,  indeed,  it  must  not  be  forgotten,  when 
protest  is  the  proper  expression  of  despairing  principle,  and 
the  best  rebuke  of  atrocious  wrong.  In  such  circumstances, 
men  can  render  no  higher  duty  to  Truth  and  Righteousness 
than  the  most  public  and  striking  declaration  of  their  dis¬ 
sent,  Third  parties,  in  such  cases,  have  the  noblest  uses, 
and  can  take  the  grandest  attitudes;  but  they  can  have  no 
permanent  place  in  affairs,  and  no  success  by  their  own 
proper  force. 

The  Free  Soil  party  of  the  last  Presidential  contest  had 
all  the  available  questions  which  were  then  “  pressing  upon 
the  public  mind,”  and  the  most  popular  side  of  them, 
among  its  sentiments  and  declared  objects;  it  had  quite  an 
array  of  men  and  means ;  and  it  had  party  discontent, 


25 


but  little  short  of  disruption,  in  one  of  its  great  rivals,  and 
an  actual  division  in  the  other,  to  help  it ;  yet  it  failed  to 
command  a  single  electoral  vote  for  its  candidates,  and  was 
thereupon  immediately  dissolved.  It  was  pledged  in  the 
most  positive  way  to  the  most  unexceptionable  anti-slavery 
action  upon  the  issues  then  asking  settlement  by  the  Fede¬ 
ral  Government ;  the  opponents  of  slavery  asked  no  more 
than  it  promised,  and  a  statesman  wholly  indifferent  to  that 
question  could  not  blame  it  with  excess;  to  this  it  added 
the  best  conditioned  points  of  liberal  legislation,  and 
endeavored  the  inauguration  of  the  advance  sentiment  of 
Democracy  in  the  Government ;  and,  besides,  it  brought 
with  it  the  warranty  of  the  highest  names,  and  the  services 
of  some  of  the  best  men  in  the  Democratic  party.  Further  : 
A  very  large  majority  of  the  people  of  the  North  were  then, 
as  now,  in  sentiment,  opposed  to  chattel  slavery,  and  in 
interest  were  all  opposed  to  its  extension  and  encroach¬ 
ments,  which  were  then  pressing  as  practically  and  urgently 
as  they  could  be  put ;  yet,  not  more  than  one-eighth  of  the 
votes  polled  in  the  Free  States  were  given  to  the  party  of 
freedom  and  progress  ! 

If  any  one,  to  avoid  the  conclusion  which  this  piece  of 
experience  furnishes  to  the  argument  for  a  continuance  or 
reorganization  of  such  party,  urges  that  the  party  was  then 
in  its  infancy,  the  answer  is  two-fold — It  died  in  that 
infancy,  and  of  course  ceased  to  grow ;  or,  it  is  a  law  of 
third  parties  that  they  never  come  to  maturity,  but,  like 
certain  other  anomalies  in  nature,  they  are  as  big  the  day 
they  are  hatched  as  they  ever  will  be  afterwards,  until  they 
merge  into  the  standard  form  again. 

Moreover,  the  withdrawal  of  the  disaffected  is  not  always 
either  an  evil  or  a  terror  to  the  erring  party  ;  for  if  the 


26 


two  rival  parties  lose  about  equal  numbers,  their  relative 
strength  is  not  thereby  affected,  and  as  long  as  the  loss  is 
equal,  and  the  seceders  not  dangerous  from  their  own  num¬ 
bers,  an  independent  party  so  formed  counts  nothing,  and 
comes  to  nothing  in  the  contest ;  nobody  loses  anything  by 
them,  but  those  whom  they  desire  to  befriend. 

I  need  not  repeat  here,  that  when  the  exigency  is  such 
that  support  cannot  rightfully  be  given,  and  silence  is  for¬ 
bidden  by  conscience,  a  party  organization  and  an  open 
protest  may  be  both  duty  and  wisdom,  though  there  be  no 
hope  of  either  immediate  or  ultimate  success  for  it.  But 
am  I  not  right  in  the  opinion  that,  ordinarily  and  simply, 
the  effect  of  withdrawing  the  virtue  and  conscience  of  the 
community  from  the  ranks  of  the  governing  parties,  leaves 
them  to  vie  with  each  other  in  flattering  and  courting  the 
vice  of  the  times  ?  And  if  it  is  fair  to  infer,  or  true  in  fact, 
that  such  protesting  third  party  comes  from  the  two  rivals 
in  pretty  equal  proportion,  then  the  secessions  rather  relieve 
than  constrain  the  conduct  of  the  regulars. 

Be  these  things  as  they  may,  it  was  in  the  presence  of 
such  a  third  party  that  all  the  enormities  of  the  last  seven 
years  have  been  enacted,  and  it  was  against  its  best  efforts 
directly  opposed  and  exerted.  The  available  questions  in 
its  hands  were — The  right  of  petition  and  free  debate, 
Texan  annexation,  the  Mexican  war,  abolition  of  the  Slave- 
trade  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  the  admission  of  Oregon 
and  California,  settlement  of  the  Texan  boundary  line,  and 
Slavery  in  the  District  and  Territories.  What  has  become 
of  all  these  questions?  And  what  is  left  of  them  for  use 
and  hope  ?  Slavery  in  the  District  and  the  repeal  of  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Law  !  for  it  is  settled  that  Utah  and  New 
Mexico  shall  come  in  as  they  please  to  present  themselves, 


27 


now  that  the  Proviso  has  failed  in  their  Territorial  organi¬ 
zation. 

I  do  not  say  that  there  is  nothing  in  the  general  and  cur¬ 
rent  conduct  of  the  Government  demanding  amendment, 
but  I  see  nothing  in  it  that  can  be  presented  with  hope  of 
effect  after  failure  with  such  a  hand  as  we  had  in  the  great 
political  game  of  the  past  seven  years. 

Further,  I  submit  that  the  history  of  the  Missouri  strug¬ 
gle  gives  no  help  to  the  idea  of  an  independent  organization 
for  the  resistance  of  a  great  national  crime.  In  1819-’20, 
there  was  no  separate  anti-slavery  party ;  yet,  if  I  am  not 
very  much  mistaken,  every  State  Legislature  of  the  North 
instructed  its  Senators,  and  requested  its  members  of  the 
House  in  Congress,  to  oppose  the  admission  of  that  State 
with  slavery  in  its  Constitution.  The  anti-slavery  sentiment 
of  that  day  found  as  full  and  effective  expression  then  as  a 
distinct  party  could  have  given  it,  and  came  something 
nearer  to  the  accomplishment  of  its  purpose  than  we  have 
done  any  time  since  1844.  The  cases  may  not  be  parallel, 
nor  the  struggles  equal  in  their  condition,  for  all  purposes, 
but  it  is  safe  to  say  that  third  parties  gain  nothing  by  the 
comparison.  It  is  as  easy  to  say,  that  if  the  anti-slavery 
vote  of  1848  had  been  sprinkled  into  the  great  parties,  it 
might  have  more  effectually  modified  them  than  it  did  in 
its  separate  action,  as  it  would  be  to  say  that  if  the  majori¬ 
ties  of  the  Northern  States  in  1820  had  been  represented 
in  Congress  by  men  elected  and  pledged  to  that  very  thing, 
Henry  Clay  could  not  have  seduced  them  from  their 
integrity. 

My  conviction  is  that  no  method  of  resistance,  possible 
to  the  reform  spirit  of  this  Union,  could  have  altered  the 
results  for  the  better,  and  I  am  as  well  satisfied  that  the 


28 


good  and  true  men  of  the  nation  have  in  all  these  instances 
done  their  best,  aye,  and  their  wisest,  too,  in  the  premises. 
I  could  not  have  been  an  honest  man,  if  I  had  withheld 
anything  either  of  service  or  sacrifice  which  the  policy  I 
am  now  considering  so  freely  has  cost  me,  and  I  have 
neither  regret  nor  reproach  for  the  past. 

I  conclude  that  an  omnibus  reform  party  cannot  be 
organized  with  reasonable  hope  of  success — that  a  party  of 
one  idea  has  no  proper  political  capabilities — that  any  inde¬ 
pendent  third  party  is  only  another  method  of  moral  sua¬ 
sion  or  of  hopeless  protest. 

What  then  ? 

I  do  not  know  that  I  can  satisfy  even  myself  as  to  the 
positive  “  duty  of  anti-slavery  voters  ”  in  the  present  con¬ 
dition  of  things,  but  you  must  allow  me  a  little  space  for 
such  word  as  I  have  to  utter  upon  this  most  interesting  and 
most  difficult  point  in  a  future  letter. 

It  is  curious  that  we  have  not  a  word  for  more  than  two 
months  from  any  of  your  correspondents  upon  the  proper 
policy  of  the  Free  Soil  party.  It  must  be  discussed  and 
settled.  I  am  doing  my  duty  to  my  friends — “  a  disagreea¬ 
ble  duty  ” — hut  not  “  with  alacrity.” 


SENIOR. 


UNIVERSmr  OF  ILLINOIS-URBANA 


3  0112  073362797 


